The opinions expressed in this op-ed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Military.com. If you would like to submit your own commentary, please send your article to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.^[1] for consideration.

The U.S. military will continue to dwindle in size and diminish in quality if it does not fix its racism problem.

My husband has served nearly 20 years in the Marine Corps^[2], and our family would gladly dedicate another decade of service if not for the racism I, his Asian-American wife, and his mixed-race children experience in the current military and political climate.

My spouse^[3] is highly skilled and experienced. He has 2,000 flight hours, top-level clearances and qualifications. He has mentored, instructed and led hundreds of others. He loves military service, yet he and others like him are leaving due to Congress' meddling. After decades of progress toward building a more equal nation and a military reflective of these American values, we see those gains evaporating.

Policymakers have come to use increasingly politicized antics to enforce an anti-pluralism agenda. For example, Republican senators continue to hold Air Force Col. Ben Jonsson's promotion hostage^[4] -- mirroring Alabama Sen. Tommy Tuberville's months-long military promotion blockade^[5]. Col. Jonsson simply encouraged his fellow officers to learn about modern-day racism^[6] -- knowledge that would strengthen leadership skills, and U.S. senators targeted him.

Congressional interference in the nonpartisan military promotions process has rippling consequences. Col. Jonsson's family life is in limbo between their current and future duty stations, without an anticipated move date -- medical care, education plans and the details of daily life remaining suspended.

Every level and rank is watching this drama unfold, wondering whether the military can function on the most basic level while partisan congressional members use the military as political pawns for their own agenda. Folks who care about upholding the military to a standard of operation and humanity, who care about morale and building trust among troops, who will speak out against something as basic and fact-based as racism, wonder whether they will be targeted next. Junior service members lose confidence in leadership. Many will hesitate to extend their time in service and not recommend this vocation to others, given what they've experienced.

I have been racially profiled by military gate guards, local law enforcement and random neighbors demanding extra verification that I am permitted to be in various locations more times than I can count. When my white husband traveled to our new duty station in advance for house hunting, local real-estate agents made racist remarks about people of color in certain neighborhoods, steering him instead to neighborhoods with all-white country clubs.

These examples are minuscule compared to the recent fatal shooting of Air Force Senior Airman Roger Fortson in Florida^[7]. They all factor into my family's consideration of safety while serving in the military. The Department of Defense (DoD) lacks sufficient policies or procedures to support families of color; our current Congress wants to keep it that way.

In 2016, 55% of service members would recommend military service to our children; today, only 32% would^[8]. Moreover, twice as many of us (31%) are unlikely or would not recommend^[9] military service at all today, compared to 2016 (15%).

Approximately 80%^[10] of service members hail from military families themselves. The military depends on veterans to recruit future generations of service members. Further, the military depends on retention to maintain expertise necessary to fight wars and save lives, not to mention save on training costs.^[11] So these trends beg the question: Who will recruit, enter and make up our military in future years?

The ones who feel safest and will remain in the military are the ones who cater to these partisan attacks. Over time, these political games will reshape the U.S. military's internal culture; rather than a broad workplace that upholds respect, equality and fair treatment, the military will shrink into a haven for prejudicial beliefs instead.

The military will not be able to recruit or retain the best talent. The most skilled will leave for more functional and less toxic institutions, my family included.

Attacks on crucial DoD programs indicate to us that certain politicians will sabotage any of the military's efforts toward self-improvement. In 2023, the House of Representatives passed a version of the 2024 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) with 18 provisions targeting diversity and inclusion initiatives within the DoD^[12]; two provisions became law^[13]. Congress is forcing our military to swing away from reality and progress.

Military families of color make up nearly half of our armed forces^[14]. We exist. We dedicate our lives to this country. And we experience racism within the military and the surrounding civilian community in which we live. We voice how these experiences impact the workplace climate and our quality of life to positively shape this community for future generations. We propose solutions at every opportunity, like in NDAA amendments.

We consider racial/ethnic discrimination^[15] when deciding whether to remain in service. We evaluate whether our leaders and the institution defend our rights and regard our safety, or if they will needlessly endanger us or ignore our concerns.

There are virtually zero programs or protocols that address racial and ethnic safety concerns of military families, and certain members of Congress aim to maintain this paucity. We don't get to choose where we live. We rely on the DoD to understand these needs and support us. The DoD must either protect against these high-risk situations or respond deftly when these dangers arise, but it does neither systemically. Congress' trend toward disempowering protective DoD programs leaves all military families less safe, and it causes families like mine to leave the service to protect ourselves.

If Congress and the DoD want to fix the military's recruitment^[16], it must face the reality that the service must be a more equitable and less racist institution. Congress can and must pass better policies through the NDAA -- policies that, at the very least, would improve data and transparency for families as they navigate safety concerns within the assignments process, for example. These changes would fortify a stronger, better, smarter military that retains and recruits the best folks across all identities.

Congress must do its job and enable the Department of Defense to meet the needs of today; our military and our country depend on it.

Khiet Ho is a licensed clinical social worker and public health professional advocating for military families at Secure Families Initiative. She is a 17-year Marine Corps spouse. 

The Marine Corps^[1] is now limiting the time Marines can participate in a program intended to provide service members a smooth transition into the civilian workforce, citing years of lost manpower.

In an administrative message posted^[2] Monday, the service said that the SkillBridge initiative -- a normally six-month program started by the Pentagon more than 10 years ago to address military-to-civilian hiring opportunities after the 2008 financial crisis -- is being cut to three or four months for Marines, depending on rank.

Marines with the rank of sergeant and below are limited to 120 days at the end of their service to participate in the program; staff noncommissioned officers, warrant officers and officers are allotted 90 days. The Corps said that its Manpower and Reserve Affairs "conservatively" estimated that more than 3,400 years of manpower were provided "external to the Marine Corps" between fiscal years 2021 and 2024.

Read Next: Into the Deep: Marine Breaks National Freediving Record with 73-Meter Plunge into Mexico Sinkhole^[3]

"The impact on the command and needs of the service must be considered and prioritized, and readiness to the force remains paramount," the Marine Corps message said.

The SkillBridge program gives service members an opportunity to "gain valuable civilian work experience" during their last days of service through training, apprenticeships or internships, according to the Pentagon. The Pentagon said the program is also valuable to the civilian industry in that it can tap into a "highly trained and motivated" population at no cost to the employer.

Troops participating in the program still receive military compensation and benefits while they work for the civilian sector. They are also still subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice, or UCMJ, and their chain of command's authority during their time in the program.

"With the availability of this opportunity and other resources that support transition from uniformed service, Manpower and Reserve Affairs reviewed the impacts to unit readiness and updated the parameters of the program," the message said. "The update balances transition support and force readiness. SkillBridge authorization is at the commander's discretion; it is not a service member’s entitlement."

The balance between giving service members a smooth shot at the civilian world on their way out and maintaining "unit readiness" has long been a sticking point for the program, as well as the transition from the military in general.

In 2022, Military.com reported that, based on a Defense Department inspector general report and veteran testimony, the transition assistant program, or TAP^[4], is peppered with low participation, delays and unwarranted denials^[5].

Then, recently separated service members told Military.com that the SkillBridge program, which operates under the overall transition apparatus, was valuable but not always available to them, because their commanders denied their participation due to mission or training requirements.

According to the DoD IG report, the SkillBridge program requires transitioning service members to research potential employers, submit applications, complete interviews with said employer, and obtain their commander's approval to participate if selected by the employer.

"As a result, service members who start less than a year in advance may not have enough time to participate in SkillBridge and may miss opportunities to obtain a job upon leaving the military," the IG report said.

The new Marine Corps message now breaks the population of participants and duration into three categories, which is meant to support "commanders in evaluating the impact of individual Marines' requests to participate in SkillBridge with mission and unit readiness requirements," said Maj. Danielle Phillips, a spokesperson for Manpower and Reserve Affairs.

The first category includes privates to sergeants who can participate in the program for four months and must obtain approval from their lieutenant colonel commander -- an update that is two months short of the current Pentagon-wide allotment.

The second category includes staff noncommissioned officers up to the rank of gunnery sergeant, junior warrant officers and officers up to the rank of major; they also have to get approval from the first lieutenant colonel in the chain of command, but can only participate in the SkillBridge program for three months.

The third and final category includes all other higher ranks, who can participate for 90 days, but must get approval from a general officer in their chain of command.

"The additional allotted time for Category I participants is because many young Marines enlist without prior commercial sector experience, and the population separating after an initial enlistment stand to benefit the most from a longer period of training with industry," Phillips said.

"The Marine Corps is committed to returning quality citizens and making resources available to ease the transition from uniformed service to successful commercial sector employment, which is why those Marines with the greatest need are afforded the most time to train," she added.

Last week, Rand Corp., a military-focused think tank, released a study that said military transition^[6] programs are heavily focused on education, but are not spending enough resources to give service members a direct opportunity to find employment.

Along with little oversight, the Rand study said that "there is also limited assistance for finding civilian apprenticeships or jobs, and few resources are available for connecting them with civilian employers."

While the study did not cite the initiative directly, the SkillBridge program intends to do just that. But Rand found "there is virtually no evidence that any of the programs we examine have had a direct effect on transition outcomes."

Reports of the Marine Corps update to the SkillBridge program surfaced last October when a new policy document -- which echoed the message posted Monday -- was "prematurely" posted online, according^[7] to Marine Corps Times.

Current Army^[8] and Air Force^[9] policies align with the Pentagon's six-month maximum for the program. Last year, the Navy^[10] limited grades E-6 to O-4 to 120 days or less in the program. Senior officers were limited to 90 days or less, but junior enlisted were still granted the full 180 days, according to a Navy administrative message^[11] from March.

"The Marine Corps supports the goal of SkillBridge, which is to facilitate service members' transition into the civilian workforce by providing them an opportunity to gain valuable experience through industry training, apprenticeships or internships," Phillips said.

"Commanders are reminded, however, that SkillBridge is not an entitlement and participation does impact readiness," she continued. "The updated three-category system is a step toward ensuring Marines at all levels understand the premium we place on readiness as the nation's crisis response force."

Related: Military's Transition Program Riddled with Issues, Report and Veterans Say^[12]